Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="reedny, post: 1480176, member: 1423"] If we were just talking about scholarships, I could probably live with some consequences. The YMCA problem went on right under the AD's nose. That said, imposing 3 per year, for 4 years, plus the recruiting limitations, was excessive -- we weren't even involved in recruiting violations. I could see maybe 2 per year for 3 years (i.e., appropriately moderate consequences). As it was, the scholarship sanctions were serious enough to create somewhat of a personnel crisis. Some players transferred that might not have had to if we had the limit (13)(I realize there were other factors). Also, the sanctions caused a lot of uncertainty, which sullied the image of the program (temporarily). This caused, or contributed to, the loss of Thomas Bryant (again, other factors were present). And all of this for what? Paying kids to ref games at the Y? Fab's paper? It's disproportionate, compared to other institutions. But the slap in the face to JB is what really took the penalties over the top. Suspension for half a season is unnecessarily harsh and humiliating for a general monitoring failure. And the vacated wins, which will permanently affect JB's legacy ... are just beyond the pale (Penn State level). This is the area where we differ. Yes, SU' will survive, as Penn State did. But the stains the NCAA put on JB's record ... were so far beyond the violations the only basis I can surmise is some personal animus by the committee. And coming from the POS COI chairman -- now commissioner of the SEC -- made the sanctions sting even more. Busting SU for a kid's paper (who spoke Portuguese), while quietly tolerating the academic charade going on at UK, is the height of hypocrisy. [/QUOTE]

Verification: What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?